Support NeoGAF

[Kusagari]

The charge should have been reckless behavior and involuntary manslaughter.

Let's be real, the prosecution knowingly went with malicious intent. The general person will hem-and-haw far more on convicting a cop of that.

 

[Shouta]

I feel like the topic post is missing something... Like what are the evidence against this?

Seems so one sided that my mind feels like something is missing.

Did the jury see something that we didn't see?

Since no one actually answered you, It's likely that the prosecution slimed up the the facts so they wouldn't get an indictment or lead the grand jury to a conclusion somehow. Considering what the Grand Jury said, maybe the prosecutor tried to make a case for higher murder but the jury didn't buy it? That might be one way of rigging it.

 

[Wanderer5]

Of course you can't

Yeah how dare they mobilize so to keep possible rioters from burning, looting, and all. Because we so need more of that.:|

 

[EnlightenedMint]

Any streams of the protest in NYC?

 

[Brawndo Addict]

But in this case they had a whole crowd watching. I believe that this was not intended was a honest mistake. However it's still a mistake. They had every right to hold him, but not right to use a choke hold. Literally. Choke-holds are banned in the state. And their ignorance of him pleading for air makes it even worse. This was an accident - but an accident that could've been easily prevented if the police would've worked as intended.
And not bringing this even to court is foul.Some shit about not provoking police officers.

It's still in the legal interest of the cop for their victim to die regardless of whether there were witnesses or videotape. My point is that this creates bad motivations in terms of the use of force and the like-hood for negative consequences as a result.

ED: They don't have to think at the time, and I don't think anyone was, "Oh I better keep going so this person dies instead, I won't get in trouble then", but I do think the understanding of risk/consequence impacts their training and the way they approach situations and their proclivity to engage in high levels of force.

 

[Cyan]

You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

Right. Unless you're holding a toy gun. Or an air rifle. Or Skittles.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Couldn't they have at least got the cop on manslaughter?! I mean what the hell.

 

[eot]

Unbelievable, not just the decision but that some people seem to be defending it and that it keeps happening.

 

[Derekloffin]

So... I.... what exactly does a cop have to do to be charged with something? I don't think body cameras will do *bleep* if stuff like this is just let off. It seems the standards for cops are 'well, if we couldn't interpret it in any other way, or even the slightest possibility exists that it was okay, we'll let them off'.

 

[ezrarh]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

Next time you break a law, let us know, we'll send someone to chokehold you to death. And we'll tape it too.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Yeah how dare they mobilize so to keep possible rioters from burning, looting, and all. Because we so need more of that.:|

Don't quote me again

 

[Narpas Sword0]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

You don't use violent means to subdue a suspect of a nonviolent crime who is expressing his first amendment rights nonviolently

Police should de-escalate situations, not escalate them to mortal incidents

 

[jwhit28]

Right. Unless you're holding a toy gun. Or an air rifle. Or Skittles.

Or walking in a dark hallway, or sleeping on your own couch

 

[Wanderer5]

Don't quote me again

Oh boo hoo I just did.

 

[GK86]

I posted this in the other cop thread about the girl that was killed in her sleep (rip). But I think the image speaks volume.

 

[Brian Griffin]

Can you explain what you mean?

I think he's referring to what the jury was instructed to make a judgement on. There is no question that the cop killed him but they were choosing to indict based on if the cop meant to kill him or not. The cop likely said no and they believed him because he's a cop.

 

[Chariot]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

The arrest itself was valid. But the handling of it was not. Please be aware what you're implying if you close your statement with the mention of that people shouldn't break the law.

It's still in the legal interest of the cop for their victim to die regardless of whether there were witnesses or videotape. My point is that this creates bad motivations in terms of the use of force and the like-hood for negative consequences as a result.

I would agree with you in cases like Michael Browns, but in this particular one I do not. The cause of death is obvious and impossible to be interpreted otherwise.

 

[Corgi]

In what way exactly?

When you take the pleading into account, not really.

just the specifics. without knowing that it made it seem like there was debate if this was a homicide or if the choking happened or not (video was CG or something).

malicious intent is different and a tricky thing, which is pretty much impossible for police to lose with how the law is structured




Has there ever been like revenge killing to cops that 'get away' with this kind of stuff?

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

Okay, here's what I don't get about people who keep spewing this crap. You keep claiming that you understand that what happened was fucked up but you keep bringing up this "he really shouldn't have have____" nonsense. Somebody shouldn't get murdered in broad daylight over suspicion of selling loose fucking cigarettes. A father of six children is dead and his killers won't even see a day in trial over it.

 

[NullPointer]

The moral of the story seems to be that having *any* encounter with police could very well lead to your death, and the police will not be held responsible. And this is a bigger risk for some than others, specifically minorities and the poor and the mentally ill. We all know that money entitles you to a separate legal system.

Blatant injustices like this can only go unpunished for so long. This culture of unaccountability we have in this country will inevitably lead to extremely violent ruptures in the social fabric. Its only a matter of time because we need a serious course correction.

 

[NinjaMouse]

Any streams of the protest in NYC?

Why do you want to stream a protest? Hoping that something goes down and don't want to miss it?

 

[SykoTech]

the problem is your skin color

Yeah, no escaping that part I guess.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Oh boo-hoo I just did.

You know what, fuck you and your thinly veiled wishy washy bullshit and that dumb ass emote

 

[Antagon]

I'm wondering...is there any way at all that the cops could do this, and actually get arrested/be indicted?

It seems like it doesn't matter if it's an accident, if it's premeditated, if the guy was surrendering, if the guy was not surrendering, if the guy was not committing a crime, if the guy had recently committed a crime, if the guy had ever commited a crime in his life, if the person was a kid, if the person was an adult, if the person was tall and fat, or small and skinny, if they were armed, if they were unarmed, if they were brandishing cosplay props, if they were in possession of any kind of questionable item, if they were wearing a hood, or no hood/hat at all.

At what point can I get shot by cops without merit AND they are penalized criminally for it?

Well, the Bart officer that shot a kneeling, unarmed guy through the back of the head did get two years of jailtime for that.

 

[Narpas Sword0]

The arrest itself was valid. But the handling of it was not. Please be aware what you're implying if you close your statement with the mention of that people shouldn't break the law.

Why trust that it was valid? Police were called to the scene to respond to a fist fight, which Garner had reportedly broken up already. They were not called to respond to selling loosie cigarettes.

 

[Cyan]

just the specifics. without knowing that it made it seem like there was debate if this was a homicide or if the choking happened or not (video was CG or something).

malicious intent is different and a tricky thing, which is pretty much impossible for police to lose with how the law is structured

I see. I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, but that certainly makes the theory that prosecution deliberately blew it more plausible.

 

[Christopher]

Why do you want to stream a protest? Hoping that something goes down and don't want to miss it?

Theirs nothing to go down everyones very calm, and excercising their right to protest.

 

[esms]

I think we're talking past each other, so this will be my last post addressing this little misunderstanding.

The problem can't be fixed easily because the problem is that our society as a whole is complicit. American society deems black people less worthy of economic opportunity, of equal treatment under the law, and even less worthy of life. Not explicitly of course, but in every meaningful way.

I also fail to see what viewing cops as "other" would do to solve the situation. Don't black people predominantly already see cops this way, and aren't they the most mistreated?

I'd have to agree, it does seem we're arguing more or less the same point. I'll just leave it at this post as well, since you've been very accommodating of me.

I believe if most people (white, black, Asian, Hispanic, other) started viewing the cops as the other, then we could get some serious police reform underway. They obviously see themselves as an occupying force, why not treat them as one?

To answer your question, I think that black people view the cops as the other because they are the most mistreated. It would be easy for me, a white man, to jump on the "thug" bandwagon because I haven't been affected by the police in the same way that many blacks have. The only problem with this is there either needs to be a catalyst, or the diffusion of widespread publicized abuse to other demographics.

The reason I don't, and never will, accept that the cops are justified in all they do is because a) personal experience and b) that it affects every US citizen's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. If they can kill a black person without consequence, that privilege can be extended to white people, also. That's just my opinion, though, and obviously heavily informed by my socioeconomic and racial background.

 

[.GqueB.]

I think he's referring to what the jury was instructed to make a judgement on. There is no question that the cop killed him but they were choosing to indict based on if the cop meant to kill him or not. The cop likely said no and they believed him because he's a cop.

So it was the wrong charge then? I'm confused by these things. I think it's pretty obvious that he didn't intend to kill him but why not try and charge him for involuntary manslaughter?

 

[Skinny Pete]

This one bothers me a lot more than the Brown case. Fuck this cop. Hope the Feds get his ass.

 

[acrid]

Right. Unless you're holding a toy gun. Or an air rifle. Or Skittles.

I'm not defending Zimmerman. I do support the police department and law.

 

[Wanderer5]

You know what, fuck you and your thinly veiled wish washy bullshit and that dumb ass emote

Lol where to start. Oh forget it, but thanks for some laughs.

 

[Biggu Bosu]

14 white people

12 people were needed to not get an indictment

So setup to fail

 

[Hatty]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

 

[hoos30]

I posted this in the other cop thread about the girl that was killed in her sleep (rip). But I think the image speaks volume.

Sums it up pretty well.

 

[Shouta]

I think he's referring to what the jury was instructed to make a judgement on. There is no question that the cop killed him but they were choosing to indict based on if the cop meant to kill him or not. The cop likely said no and they believed him because he's a cop.

Well, he likely didn't mean to kill the guy either. That's what involuntary manslaughter is for. It's sounding more and more like the prosecution purposefully failing to get an indictment

 

[Chariot]

Why trust that it was valid? Police were called to the scene to respond to a fist fight, which Garner had reportedly broken up already. They were not called to respond to selling loosie cigarettes.

Did I fall for some false information? I thought they were actually on the way to him anyway. That is making the scene even dumber. My god, has this hole of shamefully action no bottom?

 

[acrid]

Next time you break a law, let us know, we'll send someone to chokehold you to death. And we'll tape it too.

I don't. I'm the world's most boring person, yes, but I don't even speed.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

Yeah how dare they mobilize so to keep possible rioters from burning, looting, and all. Because we so need more of that.:|

'Possible rioters.'

 

[CrankyJay]

Well, he likely didn't mean to kill the guy either. That's what involuntary manslaughter is for. It's sounding more and more like the prosecution purposefully failing to get an indictment

Absolutely. It's maddening.

 

[geomon]

I am so fucking enraged right now.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

Damn it, Labor.

For those of you here fighting the good fight, don't let people get you so shook that you take bans for their bullshit.

I almost fell into that trap just a minute ago. Just don't.

 

[acrid]

That's a really odd effect when you scroll up or downwards.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

Disclaimer: Trouble may include any and all punitive punishments including death if you do much as look at officer the wrong way, ignore an officer, are oblivious to an officer, or are simply in the wrong place that time of the month.

Bonus snark: Do you believe this officer broke the law?

 

[Loakum]

....I'm speechless. The fear out there is real. I know Fox News will run their "Let's Not Rush To Judgement" "Let's Hear The Officer Side of the Story." and of course, the officer will say "I was in fear for my life..."

 

[Just_myles]

We agree to disagree. When he was cuffing him and he pulled hands back that is resisting. It sucks he died but I've been stopped and stuff before and I just comply fuck nothing is worth dying for. I have a wife and soon to be kid at home.

Yup, pretty much do as told. No point, it's a losing battle. Get it over with and go home.

 

[NinjaMouse]

Theirs nothing to go down everyones very calm, and excercising their right to protest.

I never suggested there was. I just left Manhattan, so I'm aware of what's going on. I was merely asking why stream a protest.

 

[Antagon]

Was actually going to add more but then got distracted. No, I'm not part of the problem. Wasn't this guy arrested on the same charges many times before? I'm not condoning his death, and feel it was an accident.

It sill comes down to, DON'T BREAK THE LAW. Go ahead and flame this all you want. It's the truth. You don't break the law or argue with those in authority, you don't get in trouble.

But we've seen people get in trouble who were not breaking the law. Hell, a few weeks ago a cop shot a man for grabbing his driving license when asked to.

 

[AstroNut325]

I'm just learning about this now... how the heck was there no indictment?

 

[wildfire]

I just got in an argument with a friend of a friend on FB (in a thread based on this same article) who insisted, in order, that

1) There was no chokehold (I responded with http://theocddiaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Eric-Garner.jpg photo from this thread)
2) Garner died of an asthma/heart attack (responded with the CBS link to the NYME autopsy)
3) Even if he did die of an accidental choke, the cop should lose his job, not go to jail for murder (pointed out that the choke holds were illegal for the NYPD, and that there are lower charges than Murder 1 and 2)
4) He was exonerated by a jury of his peers, why would they do that for no reason? (Pointed out that our peers don't always have our best interests in mind)

And she's still raving away about people hating cops.

If the jury consisted of people like that, no amount of evidence or legal guidelines in the world would convince them to indict this officer.

I hate dangerously irrational people like that.

Well, there's some hope:

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/artic...embers-call-federal-investigation-garner-case

"Members of New York City's congressional delegation called for federal intervention in the case of Eric Garner, after a Staten Island grand jury voted not to indict the police officer at the center of the case."

And this is why voting can work. But you you actually have to care about local politics and not just national in order to throw the bums in your district out.